We are born as very inadequate beings. We need to be fed, clothed, protected, taught the tools of civilisation until we are much older. It is not just our family or guardians, but it is the society, the system in which we grow. This system includes our family, neighbours, friends, schools, governments, the traders and the farmers and construction workers, the scientists and intellectuals. All of this comes together to make sure we become “independent” individuals in society. It takes us maybe two or three decades to reach the point where we can call ourselves as independent contributors to society. When we are younger, our job is mostly to “take”, but then a journey beings where we are obliged to “give” as well. First as volunteers at home, then being part of other institutions where we also get our first “credit” (money) to independently spend.

The stories we talk about though are mostly about individual glory. Even though we are very dependent, we are also excessively self obsessed. We have a strong need to be unique and recognised, respected and paid attention to. Because we are also individuals. We have our own memories and impulses and emotions and purposes. We are also very competitive, constantly comparing ourselves to everyone around us. We feel restless when someone else starts getting more recognition, respect than us. Specially those we consider to be our peers. This becomes a driving force for us to do better so that we also gain the same recognition. Our entire way of being becomes keeping “tabs” on people around us (social media makes this addictively simple) and trying to match up to those people.

We also find internal joy in learning and mastering new skills. The journey of mastery takes years to achieve and can be very frustrating and satisfying in itself. It requires immense patience, dedication, effort, focus and a lot more skills to master something. When you master something, the universe “reveals” itself to you in a certain way. The closer you get to achieving true excellence, the rarer you become as an individual and this gives you power, even though you did not ask for it. In a way it gives you the social recognition that everyone seeks for. If mastery is your path, then the journey can be very long and hopefully it becomes about the journey itself.

It is this social recognition that is our “map” towards contribution in some way. (You can also “entertain” people to be socially recognised). And all of this “mostly works” - the rewards get stacked up, and the trophies keep coming, and system keeps chugging along. But the system is not static, it decays, it degrades, the environment changes and it requires maintenance. You cannot be “in the system” to fix it. A great example is that you may be an “actor” in a play but then someone needs to sell the tickets and set up the lighting. As an actor, you exist inside the realm of the story, but the other support crew needs to exist “outside”. In the same way, while all of us are inside our own stories stacking up our trophies, some of us need to step outside and take greater responsibility of the system.

This part is extremely un-natural. Most of us “graduate” to more responsible roles as a part of ageing. Age helps here because it takes a while to understand the fact that there is a context outside of your own system and that is the “community”. In my observations, people who “graduate” to be leaders, just end up being clones of leaders they have seen. They don’t really “respond” to the dynamics of a fast changing environment. This is what I feel is the hardest thing about leadership and something that took me a lot of time to realise. The role of the leader is to manage the “outside context”*. It is about managing the tickets and the lighting. It is about making sure that the system is healthy and suitable.

One of my favourite dialogues of “The Wire” is when a senior police officer is giving advice to an up and coming officer who has been promoted. Here is what he says:

“Couple weeks from now, you’re gonna be in some district somewhere with 11 to 12 uniforms looking to you for everything. And some of them are gonna be good police. Some of them are gonna be young and stupid. A few are gonna be pieces of shit. But all of them will take their cue from you.

You show loyalty, they learn loyalty. You show them it’s about the work, it’ll be about the work. You show them some other kinda game, then that’s the game they’ll play.“

Then he reinforces it with an anecdote where there was a bad culture:

“I came on in the Eastern, and there was a piece-of-shit lieutenant hoping to be a captain, piece-of-shit sergeants hoping to be lieutenants. Pretty soon we had piece-of-shit patrolmen trying to figure the job for themselves. And some of what happens then is hard as hell to live down.”

Finally the punch-line:

Comes a day you’re gonna have to decide whether it’s about you or about the work.

—

This line has been resonating in me for a while. What I have realised in many years of reading “statements of purpose” in Frappe is that it is always about social recognition, it is about me. It is rare to find someone who says their purpose is to “fix the system”. While social recognition is a fair goal for most people, for me the true leaders are those who have bigger goals - to win as a company. This not only extends to the company or institution, but is also when you recognise that there is no one else who is responsible for society or the nation or humanity but yourself.

Yes this can go to the extreme where you completely surrender yourself to the outside context (which frequently happens with religious or nationalist fundamentalists) and forget your individuality. This is not what I am advocating. The right approach is to align with the “purpose” of the system, not its rituals or orthodoxies. I am advocating that we understand the purpose of the systems and either try and contribute or call out or fix the problems. Be a reformer, not a blind follower.

Too often, too many of us are too obsessed with our own social recognition and not able to think outside of our own context. This is what I feel makes institutions decay or remain mediocre. For me this is clearly the best definition of leadership. To understand the “true purpose” of the system or institution or team you are leading and focus on that. That is the job - the social recognition is an outcome. I hope people are able to gain the wisdom to be able to make the switch from it being about “me” to it being about “the purpose”. In my view, at some point the difference between the two ceases to exist.

—

Notes:

Outside Context (extract from Excession by Iain Banks): “An Outside Context Problem was the sort of thing most civilisations encountered just once, and which they tended to encounter rather in the same way a sentence encountered a full stop. The usual example given to illustrate an Outside Context Problem was imagining you were a tribe on a largish, fertile island; you’d tamed the land, invented the wheel or writing or whatever, the neighbours were cooperative or enslaved but at any rate peaceful and you were busy raising temples to yourself with all the excess productive capacity you had, you were in a position of near-absolute power and control which your hallowed ancestors could hardly have dreamed of and the whole situation was just running along nicely like a canoe on wet grass . . . when suddenly this bristling lump of iron appears sail-less and trailing steam in the bay and these guys carrying long funny-looking sticks come ashore and announce you’ve just been discovered, you’re all subjects of the Emperor now, he’s keen on presents called tax and these bright-eyed holy men would like a word with your priests.”